Going to meet a friend here tomorrow, I know you have to pay for parking and that u get it back when u purchase something, does anyone know how long you can stay I will be in the pub not going anywhere else ???

Don't pay it. Its a private company called europark.
I've been a hundred times never seen a warden.
Wetherspoons want to stop people parking there for the hospital, which is fair enough. But asking them to pay is a joke, which they cant enforce anyway.

Hi its £1 an hour but you get a voucher with your parking ticket to take inside and they take it off your bill, so really its free to park. I understand what TJC1 is saying but why give yourself the stress of receiving letters about a 'fine' when it can be totally avoided. I think you can stay for 3 hours but I'm not certain of that, it certainly isn't any less than 3 hours.

Hi its £1 an hour but you get a voucher with your parking ticket to take inside and they take it off your bill, so really its free to park. I understand what TJC1 is saying but why give yourself the stress of receiving letters about a 'fine' when it can be totally avoided. I think you can stay for 3 hours but I'm not certain of that, it certainly isn't any less than 3 hours.

I think you can pay for 1, 2 or 3 hours, but I think it's now £1:20 per hour. We sometimes eat there and last time I went paid £2:40 for 2 hours, IIRC. Although our meal usually takes less than 1 hour, we might as well pay for two, as we get it back anyway.

I use the SFN car park fairly often the last time was I think 19th Dec. Paid £1 ph and as usual paid for 2hrs.

You are supposed to spend minimum £10 which is easy if 2 of you are eating.
Hand over the ticket when you pay for the food. I have had refunds on much less than £10 bill.

Its a 2-part ticket. Make sure you display the correct half.

Believe me when I say the warden is KEEN. I have been ticketed twice but got the tickets overturned as they were times I was parked up for the hospital and they were very genuine cases for a delay in return.

Hi its £1 an hour but you get a voucher with your parking ticket to take inside and they take it off your bill, so really its free to park. I understand what TJC1 is saying but why give yourself the stress of receiving letters about a 'fine' when it can be totally avoided. I think you can stay for 3 hours but I'm not certain of that, it certainly isn't any less than 3 hours.

I overheard the duty manager saying recently that in reality any valid ticket displayed would allow you to park there for pretty much as long as needed.

Just anecdotal, but as previous poster has said, these private invoice based companies can't really enforce anything now...

This point seems to lost on most people on this thread and in general. It's not enforceable.
All they are doing, by paying for private parking, is making it difficult for everyone. It's keeping the private parking companies like excel in business. More and more spaces will be patrolled by private companies.
So, you are not doing the right thing by complying.

This point seems to lost on most people on this thread and in general. It's not enforceable.
All they are doing, by paying for private parking, is making it difficult for everyone. It's keeping the private parking companies like excel in business. More and more spaces will be patrolled by private companies.
So, you are not doing the right thing by complying.

People aren't complying and paying to the parking company. What people are saying is that if you are using the pub then paying for the parking and getting it reimbursed is a lot less hassle than having loads of demand letters come through the post, even if they are not enforceable. No on has said to pay the invoice, this thread is not about that and if you want to comment on that go to the other millions of threads dedicated to that. It is common courtesy to not park in a company's car park if you are not visiting the company, you would be very annoyed if you went to a pub and couldn't park because the car park was full of people who are not using the pub.

People aren't complying and paying to the parking company. What people are saying is that if you are using the pub then paying for the parking and getting it reimbursed is a lot less hassle than having loads of demand letters come through the post, even if they are not enforceable. No on has said to pay the invoice, this thread is not about that and if you want to comment on that go to the other millions of threads dedicated to that. It is common courtesy to not park in a company's car park if you are not visiting the company, you would be very annoyed if you went to a pub and couldn't park because the car park was full of people who are not using the pub.

I totally agree if I received one of these 'fines' and they were sending me letters and threatening court action I would be very stressed about it.
We visit the Francis Newton fairly frequently and I would never not pay to park its just not worth the hassle.

This point seems to lost on most people on this thread and in general. It's not enforceable.
All they are doing, by paying for private parking, is making it difficult for everyone. It's keeping the private parking companies like excel in business. More and more spaces will be patrolled by private companies.
So, you are not doing the right thing by complying.

ďMaking it difficult for everyone?Ē Certainly not. People parking and paying make it better for me, (and I would guess also better for other customers). I am not inconvenienced. Iím quite happy with the current system.

What they are doing is making it easier for all customers. If I were to drive there and find that the car park was already full, then I would take my custom elsewhere. If I did this this two or three times on the trot I would assume that it would always be the case and so not bother going back.

If the reason that the car park was full was because Pub was also full of customers, then the owners would be happy enough. However, if it was because the car park was being used by people not eating or drinking there, they would be less happy. I presume this was the case, and why they acted to bring in the charges.

People aren't complying and paying to the parking company. What people are saying is that if you are using the pub then paying for the parking and getting it reimbursed is a lot less hassle than having loads of demand letters come through the post, even if they are not enforceable. No on has said to pay the invoice, this thread is not about that and if you want to comment on that go to the other millions of threads dedicated to that. It is common courtesy to not park in a company's car park if you are not visiting the company, you would be very annoyed if you went to a pub and couldn't park because the car park was full of people who are not using the pub.

Not disputing wetherspoons have to keep the carpark for pub users. You misunderstood. I think it is the point that if you keep complying you are adding to the problem though.

---------- Post added 02-01-2013 at 15:03 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eater Sundae

“Making it difficult for everyone?” Certainly not. People parking and paying make it better for me, (and I would guess also better for other customers). I am not inconvenienced. I’m quite happy with the current system.

What they are doing is making it easier for all customers. If I were to drive there and find that the car park was already full, then I would take my custom elsewhere. If I did this this two or three times on the trot I would assume that it would always be the case and so not bother going back.

If the reason that the car park was full was because Pub was also full of customers, then the owners would be happy enough. However, if it was because the car park was being used by people not eating or drinking there, they would be less happy. I presume this was the case, and why they acted to bring in the charges.

What about all the people who pay 'invoices' from private companies. If these companies did not exist this wouldnt happen. If more people 'grew a pair' and stopped thinking about themselves and their 'inconviniences' we'd all be better off.

Not disputing wetherspoons have to keep the carpark for pub users. You misunderstood. I think it is the point that if you keep complying you are adding to the problem though.

---------- Post added 02-01-2013 at 15:03 ----------

What about all the people who pay 'invoices' from private companies. If these companies did not exist this wouldnt happen. If more people 'grew a pair' and stopped thinking about themselves and their 'inconviniences' we'd all be better off.

Not if we could no longer use the pub cark park and miss out on the opportunity to eat there when we want to.

What method should the Francis Newtron use to provide a car park for just its customers?

Not if we could no longer use the pub cark park and miss out on the opportunity to eat there when we want to.

What method should the Francis Newtron use to provide a car park for just its customers?

So what if europark decide to charge double, then wetherspoons decide to not issue refunds? then what happens, where are you going to park? all because certain people decided to obey the terms set by europark. Or indeed any private company issuing invoices.
And when this happens are private companies more or less likely to expand? are the companies using them more and less likely to use this method of extorting money from customers?

Do you really think europark and wetherspoons have your best interests at heart?? do you think they act fairly? OF COURSE NOT! they are there to profit from you as much as you will allow them to.

Not disputing wetherspoons have to keep the carpark for pub users. You misunderstood. I think it is the point that if you keep complying you are adding to the problem though.

---------- Post added 02-01-2013 at 15:03 ----------

What about all the people who pay 'invoices' from private companies. If these companies did not exist this wouldnt happen. If more people 'grew a pair' and stopped thinking about themselves and their 'inconviniences' we'd all be better off.

I actually think charging and reimbursing a small amount like the francis Newton do stops these companies from bullying unsuspecting motorists. If there's a pay and display system then people know its private land and anyone who doesn't know these invoices are uninforceable cannot be bullied for not seeing the signs.

So what if europark decide to charge double, then wetherspoons decide to not issue refunds? then what happens, where are you going to park? all because certain people decided to obey the terms set by europark. Or indeed any private company issuing invoices.
And when this happens are private companies more or less likely to expand? are the companies using them more and less likely to use this method of extorting money from customers?

Do you really think europark and wetherspoons have your best interests at heart?? do you think they act fairly? OF COURSE NOT! they are there to profit from you as much as you will allow them to.

It's whats called the 'thin end of the wedge' my friend.

Of course theyíre out to make a profit. What company in its right mind isnít? Iím not a shareholder in Wetherspoons, but I am an occasional customer. Iím quite happy for them to make a profit. If they donít they will shut down and I will not have the option of eating there. If they want to keep me as a customer they will offer a service that meets my needs. Iím not a prisoner of Wetherspoons and I doubt if anyone else is either. If they stop refunding parking ticket costs (whether the parking charges go up or not) I would then reconsider whether itís still worth my while to eat there. In dealings with Wetherspoons and similar, I can and will vote with my feet (or my car in this case). If the service doesnít meet my needs, then I will go elsewhere. Similarly, if they fail to have any parking spaces available when I arrive there, then I will also go elsewhere.

Can you now answer the earlier question which you conveniently ignored, ďWhat method should the Francis Newton use to provide a car park for just its customers? ď

Of course theyíre out to make a profit. What company in its right mind isnít? Iím not a shareholder in Wetherspoons, but I am an occasional customer. Iím quite happy for them to make a profit. If they donít they will shut down and I will not have the option of eating there. If they want to keep me as a customer they will offer a service that meets my needs. Iím not a prisoner of Wetherspoons and I doubt if anyone else is either. If they stop refunding parking ticket costs (whether the parking charges go up or not) I would then reconsider whether itís still worth my while to eat there. In dealings with Wetherspoons and similar, I can and will vote with my feet (or my car in this case). If the service doesnít meet my needs, then I will go elsewhere. Similarly, if they fail to have any parking spaces available when I arrive there, then I will also go elsewhere.

Can you now answer the earlier question which you conveniently ignored, ďWhat method should the Francis Newton use to provide a car park for just its customers? ď

I think you missed the point again which is about private car parking companies, not wetherspoons.

I think you missed the point again which is about private car parking companies, not wetherspoons.

I understand exactly what you are saying. I also understand that you are talking a load of rubbish.

Other situations might be different, but in this case a private company provides a service to Wetherspoons, to try and ensure that there are enough parking spaces for its customers. It’s a bit of a blunt instrument, but it only exists at that site because Wetherspoons want to stop those people who ignore that it is a private car park.

As growup has pointed out. The car park is well signed, as is the pay and display. It works fine for the users of Wetherspoons, so why would they want to change it?

I understand exactly what you are saying. I also understand that you are talking a load of rubbish.

Other situations might be different, but in this case a private company provides a service to Wetherspoons, to try and ensure that there are enough parking spaces for its customers. Itís a bit of a blunt instrument, but it only exists at that site because Wetherspoons want to stop those people who ignore that it is a private car park.

As growup has pointed out. The car park is well signed, as is the pay and display. It works fine for the users of Wetherspoons, so why would they want to change it?